Download Free The Securities Litigation Review Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online The Securities Litigation Review and write the review.

Global Securities Litigation and Enforcement provides a clear and exhaustive description of the national regime for the enforcement of securities legislation in cases of misrepresentation on financial markets. It covers 29 jurisdictions worldwide, some of them are important although their law is not well known. It will be an invaluable resource for academics and students of securities litigation, as well as for lawyers, policy-makers and regulators. The book also provides a comprehensive contribution debate on whether public or private enforcement is preferable in terms of development of securities markets. It will appeal to those interested in the legal origins theory and in comparative securities law, and shows that the classification of jurisdictions within legal families does not explain the differences in legal regimes. While US securities law often serves as a model for international convergence, some of its elements, such as securities class actions, have not been adopted worldwide.

Investor protection

United States. Congress. House. Committee on Financial Services. Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises

Published: 2007

Total Pages: 128


Get eBook

Designed to suit a variety of two or three credit courses and seminars, the casebook is being used to teach (1) courses in "securities litigation" that examine litigation topics under the Exchange Act and the Securities Act; (2) courses in "securities enforcement" that center on SEC and criminal enforcement, market manipulation, insider trading, and the professional responsibilities of attorneys and accountants; and (3) more specialized courses or seminars that build around the theme of "current topics in securities litigation."
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
This paper reports on a review of recent federal securities court decisions that relate to accountant's liability issues. The review covers litigation arising under the Securities Act of 1933 as well as the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 with heavy emphasis on the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) of 1995 which amended both the 1933 and 1934 Acts. Regarding the 1933 Act, emphasis is given to the question of whether aftermarket purchasers can sue under Section 11. The issue was apparently settled when the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that aftermarket purchasers can sue if they can directly trace their securities to the deficient registration statement. Regarding the 1934 Act, the paper analyzes recent court interpretations of the PSLRA and their potential impact on accountants. The paper stresses two important trends resulting from the PSLRA: 1) that plaintiff allegations of the defendant's motive and opportunity alone are usually not enough to allow a suit to survive the pleading stage, and 2) that plaintiffs must avoid generalized charges and cite particular facts that support a strong inference of the defendant's scienter.